HISTORIC QUEENSLAND DEBATE ON LEAGUE OF RIGHTS

The biggest and most representative meeting in living memory took place at Dalby, Queensland, on Wednesday, November 4, when National Director Mr. Eric Butler scored the greatest victory yet gained by the League as he debated an allegation that the League was subversive. The repercussions of this historic debate will be nation-wide. The extent of the League's rapidly growing influence in Southern Queensland, and the intensity of interest generated by a vicious smear campaign was graphically demonstrated by the huge audience, which overflowed the large RSL hall. Many of those present came from up to 200 miles away. In the audience were Federal Country Party Member Mr. Jim Corbett, Mr. R. Sparkes President of the Queensland Country Party, and many other prominent public figures.

The depth of the desperate attempt to halt the League's advance was revealed early in the debate when Mr. R. Bahnisch, who had precipitated the debate with the allegation of subversion, read a signed statement by Mr. Edward St. John, former Liberal Member at Canberra. Mr. St. John charged that the League's activities "have no rightful place in a democratic society such as ours." Anyone opposing the League publicly had his full support and admiration.
Another statement was submitted by Mr. Isi Leibler Political Zionist spokesman of Melbourne, who praised the major anti-League smear book by K.D. Gott. For the first time to our knowledge Mr. Leibler admitted the Communist background of Mr. Gott. But he left Mr. Bahnisch in a most embarrassing position by assuring him that it was most unlikely that the former Commonwealth Attorney-General, Mr. B. Snedden, had ever written a letter stating that there was no reason to believe that the League was other than a reputable organisation. Mr. Bahnisch, who expressed support for "democratic socialism", said that Mr. Leibler claimed Mr. Snedden would rather cut his throat than write such a letter.
Supported by this arrogant claim by Mr. Leibler, Mr. Bahnisch persisted with his denial that the Attorney General's Department would have stated that the League was not subversive.

The meeting exploded into what the Toowoomba daily paper, The Chronicle, described as boisterous applause, when Mr. Butler produced Mr. Snedden's letter, read it out, walked across the stage, placed it in front of Mr. Bahnisch and asked him" to now stand up like a man and apologise." Mr. Bahnisch looked at the document with disbelief, made a few desperate attempts to comment, and sat down. But he destroyed himself by refusing to apologise.

Other highlights of the debate were: Toowoomba Liberal Party official, and candidate at the last Queensland State elections, Dr. Leigh Wallman, attempted to smear the League in a series of questions designed to show that the Australian League of Rights was similar to Hitler's movement. One similarity was that, like Hitler, Mr. Butler was a "spell-binding" speaker! In the comment of one member of the audience, Mr. Butler's reply "hit Dr. Wallman for six". Queensland Country Party President R. Sparkes, while praising the League's anti-Communism, appealed to Mr. Butler to do what he could to stop people from leaving the Country Party or voting for the Labor Party. This public appeal was seen by many as a desperate effort by the Country Party President to stem the tide so strongly now running against the Government.

Mr. Butler rejected the contention that the League's programme was destroying the Government. He insisted that the League was urging that the Liberal-Country Party coalition to stop destroying itself by progressively departing from its own stated principles. One Country Party leader has been quoted as saying that a sufficiently widespread distribution of the League's special Survey "Australia's Liberal-Socialist Road To Serfdom" would definitely destroy the Government. If this is true, then the Government has only itself to blame for its blatant dishonouring of its own principles.

* A questioner asked Mr. Butler was there any truth in a rumour being circulated that he had been in interned by the Labor Government for pro-Nazi activities during the Second World War. Mr. Butler said that this was ridiculous. He had previously informed the audience that the three male members of his family had all served in the Second AIF. He gave his army number, pointed out that he had served for twenty months without leave in the islands north of Australia, had been sent back to the mainland and appointed as an instructor for six months at the Canungra jungle training school. He was then posted as an instructor at the Officers' Training School, Seymour, Victoria. We are informed that the question asked at the Dalby debate is related to an ugly rumour circulating in Queensland Country party circles following a recent Central Council meeting. The Country Party would be well advised to stop this type of smearing, and to check on the background of those initiating it.

One League supporter has commented as follows on the Dalby debate: "Mr. Bahnisch and those backing him should actually be thanked for providing the League with such a splendid platform. Mr. Eric Butler was devastating. The widespread publicity was magnificent. The critics have been crushed, the waverers are getting off the fence in increasing numbers to join the League, and the committed have been given a shot of increased enthusiasm and dedication. The truth is now advancing rapidly."

NOW OR NEVER

LEAGUE"S RURAL PROGRAMME PRODUCING POLITICAL RESPONSE

"The Commonwealth Government will establish a finance insurance corporation to ensure long-term loans to the ailing rural industry. The Prime Minister (Mr. Gorton), announcing this last night, said the corporation would be run on similar lines to the Housing Finance Insurance Corporation. This Senate election promise appears to be on similar lines to the Rural Finance Corporation expounded by the Democratic Labour Party." - The Chronicle, Toowoomba Queensland, November 5.

The Prime Minister's Senate election promise, for what it is worth, is at least striking evidence of the growing effectiveness of the hard League of Rights campaigning, particularly the work of its specialist division, The Institute of Economic Democracy, in the rural areas of Australia over the past two years. There is little doubt that the Government's rural election promise was greatly stimulated by the bold announcement of Senator Gair in his Senate policy speech on November 1.

A comparison of DLP statements and Mr. Gorton's statements clearly indicate the DLP programme is much more adequate. Senator Gair has not only stressed the need for long-term loans, but the necessity for low-interest rates. He also specifically referred to the small farmers, who "had to be kept going."

Mr. Gorton made no reference to low-interest rates, and also hedged on which primary producers were to be provided with some type of financial stability. While in one breath dissociated himself from the slogan of "Get big or get out", he went on to say, "But I do mean that harsh realities of the world will require a policy of 'get to a stage where you can produce at a cost that meets the market prices - or accept a lower income or leave the industry"'. The "harsh realities" Mr. Gorton refers to are the inflationary Marxist financial policies which are destroying the basis of the free enterprise system by forcing economic centralism as producers desperately attempt to meet rising financial costs.
A substantial reduction in interest charges would be a welcome reduction of the primary producers' financial costs.

The National Policy of the Australian Country Party contains the following: "The provision of term loans for long-term at a low rate of interest to facilitate the development and rehabilitation of rural industries." The Federal Country has for years done nothing to have this policy implemented. It has officially shown a strong resentment to the League of Rights' insistence that it honour its own policy. And contrary to the assurances of Country Party leader John McEwen that his party can get more results as a member of the Coalition, the Prime Minister's election policy still ignores the necessity of low-interest rates.

If the DLP gains electoral support in the rural areas at the expense of the Country and Liberal parties it will be because it has advanced a more realistic policy. The DLP proposals will not go far enough for some people. But they are a welcome step in the right direction and should encourage all League actionists to continue their activities, confident that the politicians are starting to respond.

ACQUISITION OF LAND THROUGH DEBT CONTROL

"In effect this negative income tax would be part payment by the Government in advance of purchase of the farm at market rates by the Land Authority." - Dr. H. Schapper, reported in The Weekly Times, October 28.

The Weekly Times report in full was an explanation of Dr. Schapper's concept for solving the rapidly deteriorating financial position of the farming community. What it amounts to is a plan to utilise the present financial policies, basically unchanged, to ensure continued and increasing rural debt. As the debt increases, control over property ownership passes from the individual to the moneylender. As Dr. Schapper envisages the process, the transition is brought about by a system of "refinancing mortgages." Dr. Schapper admits something must be done about the debt situation of the farmers, but nothing should be done to get them off the financial hook by which control over their property can eventually be obtained.

Although extension of the period to pay back loans is conceded, it is stressed that no reduction in interest or writing off of the debt should be accepted. As farmers are driven down the economic scale of existence they will need to borrow money to live... assistance payment could be made direct to the farmers from the Treasury, in the form of a negative, or reverse income tax." That is, the state returns some small portion of what it has already taken.
But, don't think for a moment it is really a gift, oh no! In effect this negative income tax would be part payment by the Government in advance of purchase of the farm at market rates by the Land Authority. Thus the full implementation of the socialist concept of land ownership by the State.

As the economic screw is tightened more farmers and their land would be swallowed up. Such are the economic theories taught in our universities. Revealing the full extent of his socialist philosophy Dr. Schapper comments, "such a method would break the self perpetuating unviable, family farm cycle."
The alternative concept ? " ... a managerial information service should be established within all State Departments of Agriculture."

CHURCHMAN WARNS AGAINST "ANT-HEAP OF ANONYMITY"

"People should be on the alert against everything in society which debased the individual." - The Dean of Melbourne, Rev. T. Thomas, The Sun, November 2.

The Dean went on, "we should be on the alert against everything tending towards mass control, all which exalts the machine and the system above the human being, the worship of know-how at the expense of know-why, the cult of passivity and conformity."
"A major problem which confronts us in our modern mass urban culture is the slide towards an ugly ant-heap of anonymity."

The Dean said the greatest bulwark on earth against the creeping cult of anonymity was the Christian faith. We have only one question. Every faith has a policy (works), What is the policy of the Christian faith in regard to the monolithic state?

ON TARGET BULLETIN

SUBJECT FOR DISCUSSION
THE POWER OF THE SENATE

The Federal systems which was established in 1901 when the States transferred power on a limited basis to bring about the establishment of a national government, is in danger of complete destruction. A situation brought about by the growth of the financial powers of the Federal Government. This power of finance amounting to a monopoly control is the result of inherent defects in financial policy, which automatically generates increasing indebtedness.

The 1927 referendum, which gave the Commonwealth the power to establish the Loan Council through which it in turn controls the borrowing of all the States, was a major step towards Commonwealth control of the States. Since the 1942 legislation establishing Uniform Taxation (seceded by the States after an express promise made that at the end of the war the States would be given back their taxing powers.) the Commonwealth has been able to decide the two important financial functions.
1. How much taxation will be re-distributed to the States.
2. How much money the States can borrow.
The whole edifice is built on the supposition that money is only obtainable by borrowing it from those institutions, which create it.

In a recent letter to a League actionist Mr. Phillip Lynch said 60 per cent of the public debt was held by private institutions. The Senate was formed to act as the watchdog of State rights. Obviously it has failed. We must regenerate a new understanding of how the Senate can challenge the power of the Commonwealth and restore the sovereignty of the States. State Members of Parliament, who are quiet at Senate election time, should be asked to challenge all Senate candidates to say where they stand on State Rights.

GUIDELINES FOR ECONOMIC ACTIONISTS

Interest rates are extortionate, to put the matter mildly. It has been noticed in the reports coming in to us that the question of how much it costs to create the nation's credit supply is being dodged by the Treasurer. As much as possible it should be taken up with your own M.P. Tell him you will not be satisfied until a correct estimates based on services rendered and materials used and other overhead expenses, is supplied.
Just as a manufacturer can give exact cost details on his product and supply such information to shareholders if demanded, we as shareholders in Government have the right to know just what is the cost of the most basic commodity produced on our behalf.
Once such a figure can be obtained we can then press for a much lower interest rate, and bring he whole matter down to a basis of morality.